February 17, 2018

"... second, that speaking out about American politics requires a foreign citizen list their source and expenditure of funding to the Federal Election Commission; and third, that mistakes on visa applications constitute 'fraud' on the State Department. All appear to borrow from the now-discredited 'honest services' theories Mueller’s team previously used in corporate and bribery cases, cases the Supreme Court overturned for their unconstitutional vagueness. The indictment raises serious issues under the free speech clause of the First Amendment and due process rights under the Fifth Amendment."

143 comments:

My view from the hinterlands of America is that the Steele dossier is obviously Russian disinformation, bought by the Clinton campaign. If we can indict thirteen Russians for whispering disinformation into Americans ears what is the punishment for those who mainline it into our veins?

The Democratic Party is set to name its first undocumented 'Dreamer' superdelegate"Ellie Pérez, of Arizona, will be the first undocumented person to cast a ballot for a presidential nominee in a primary contest. The announcement by the Democratic leadership comes at a critical time for Dreamers as the clock runs out in March for an Obama-era program that protects them from deportation....Pérez, who is Mexican-born, will be able to vote as a superdelegate in the party's 2020 convention to nominate the Democratic presidential candidate, the highest any undocumented person has risen in the presidential election process."

"first, that speaking out about American politics requires a foreign citizen to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act...""... second, that speaking out about American politics requires a foreign citizen list their source and expenditure of funding to the Federal Election Commission; and third, that mistakes on visa applications constitute 'fraud' on the State Department."

I love it. Rule of law, baby. Let's go after the Dreamers dreaming aloud, or John Oliver and Trevor Noah, just to set an example.

My interpretation of the Mueller indictment is that he is looking for a way out of the bullshit investigation he is saddled with. Indicting 13 foreign nationals on bullshit charges and leaving out all Americans of either political stripe is his version of "peace with honor".

I object to those on the right who say, “See, there’s nothing there. Stop this investigation.” There’s plenty of corruption there and it exposes a corrupt collusion between the “deep state,” Democrats, Obama, Hillary, and the media.

I want justice. The corruption here more than stinks: it undermines our faith in government at the deepest, foundational levels.

Yes, that is possible. He can try to wind this down without progs freaking out. From that standpoint, Brennan's "hoax in tatters" comment is helpful, licking the bone Bob threw them.

The point of the investigation is the investigation. But an otherwise pointless investigation, with no basis and nothing to show, must at some point run out of steam. I still think Bob will keep on keepin' on for a while.

Erik Njorl, you are hereby charged, one, that you did, on or about 11/26, conspire to publicise a London Borough in the course of a BBC saga; two, that you were wilfully and persistently a foreigner; three, that you conspired to do things not normally considered illegal...

I expect Mueller to slowly edge out off the room firing off a couple more mini-flares as he goes. This absurd indictment was meant to provide cover for all the criminals who fanned this hoax into flame.

”From "Does Mueller Indictment Mean Clinton Campaign Can Be Indicted for Chris Steele?" by Robert Barnes, who observes that Mueller chose targets who will never be brought to trial and therefore knew he was using a legal theory that would not be tested in court.”

Some observed in yesterday’s comments that Putin could really stick it to the US by allowing one or more of these individuals to actually be prosecuted. He could probably find volunteers, but if not maybe he could kidnap one and dump them in the US where the FBI could arrest them.

Oso Negro said: "My interpretation of the Mueller indictment is that he is looking for a way out of the bullshit investigation he is saddled with. Indicting 13 foreign nationals on bullshit charges and leaving out all Americans of either political stripe is his version of "peace with honor".

My thoughts exactly. Mueller can't bag Trump. All fingers now point to HRC and her campaign. He needed a path to avoid indicting Hillary et al. The splash will be: Hey, I let Trump off the hook, let's all forget about Hillary and just go home.

"The point of the investigation is the investigation. But an otherwise pointless investigation, with no basis and nothing to show, must at some point run out of steam. I still think Bob will keep on keepin' on for a while."

Exactly, the thugs in WI, despite sowing plenty o discord, came up with nothing on a ginned up "theory" of broken campaign finance laws. They also succeeded in drying up conservative contributions, for a time.

”My thoughts exactly. Mueller can't bag Trump. All fingers now point to HRC and her campaign. He needed a path to avoid indicting Hillary et al. The splash will be: Hey, I let Trump off the hook, let's all forget about Hillary and just go home.”

I also think this is what’s going on. I hope it doesn’t work. I hope that when the Mueller investigation is done, Sessions would persue the FBI/DOJ conspirators.

Another reason for the timing may be to show the investigation was not all about the Steele Dossier. The recent memos from Nunes and Grassley hurt the Steele dossiers credibility a lot. And showed the fisa warrants were based on it.

I predict Muellers investigation will continue at least until after the midterms. It's the only thing protecting the true election meddlers from Trump. Government is too important to be left in the hands of voters.

Trump is missing an opportunity. He should require Mueller to give him a complete briefing on this foreign intelligence matter. Neither Trump nor his campaign are tainted in any way, and as President, Trump has the responsibility to decide what, if any, response the US should make. Mueller will want to refuse to give the briefing but there’s no legitimate ground to do so.

This is about future elections, not just the last one.The already established public private partnership between Google, Facebook, etc and the government will need to he much more aggressive in protecting Americans from opinions going forward.

My view from the hinterlands of America is that the Steele dossier is obviously Russian disinformation, bought by the Clinton campaign.

Read it and it is about at the level of those memes, except not really as funny, with the exception of the “I hope it is really true” thing about Trump paying hookers to pee on a bed where Obama slept. That does seem more and more likely true as time goes by. Still funny, like flag burning that actually affects liberals.

Somewhere, wiggling around in all this maneuvering, legalese and misdirection, is the astonishing thought that Fake News might be a crime. A crime punishable by the government at its discretion against disfavored defendants. Be careful what you wish for, partisans.

This article addresses some questions raised in the earlier thread on the Mueller indictment. I think those opposed to Trump ought to be careful about what they wish for; in 2020 an aggressive replacement to Sessions could indict the Democratic party, etc., based in the theory underlying these indictments. (Hat tip to Fernandistein above who notes that Democrats allow non-citizens to influence the election by being super-delegates to their convention.)

Mueller chose targets who will never be brought to trial and therefore knew he was using a legal theory that would not be tested in court.

And that's why the indictment seems like a pretext to something else.

________________________________________________________

Reasonable speculation: This is Mueller's quasi-peace offering to FBI Inspector General Horowitz. In essence:

"Look I know that McCabe and Strzok fucked up. And that Comey enabled them. Yes, they went too far with Lynch and Obama's DOJ. But Comey and McCabe are gone and Strzok is twisting in the wind, desperately clinging to his pension. They tried, but failed to derail Trump, and now I've helped neutralize them as penance. Here's the deal. If you don't come down too hard on the FBI, which we both love, I won't come down too hard on Kushner and Don, Jr. Whaddya say?"

Just when you thought the Deep State swamp couldn´t get any murkier and the stench any more repugnant, we are reminded by Judicial Watch´s Tom Fitton in a Feb. 13 tweet of how Robert Mueller´s FBI worked with Lois Lerner´s IRS to target Tea Party and other groups in the run-up to the Obama re-election campaign (snip) The irony is that the same Robert Mueller now investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election cooperated with Lois Lerner and the IRS to intervene on President Obama´s behalf in the lead-up to the 2012 presidential election. - American Thinker

Judicial Watch today released new Department of Justice (DOJ) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) documents that include an official "DOJ Recap" report detailing an October 2010 meeting between Lois Lerner, DOJ officials and the FBI to plan for the possible criminal prosecution of targeted nonprofit organizations for alleged illegal political activity.

The newly obtained records also reveal that the Obama DOJ wanted IRS employees who were going to testify to Congress to turn over documents to the DOJ before giving them to Congress. Records also detail how the Obama IRS gave the FBI 21 computer disks, containing 1.25 million pages of confidential IRS returns from 113,000 nonprofit social 501(c)(4) welfare groups – or nearly every 501(c)(4) in the United States – as part of its prosecution effort. According to a letter from then-House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) to IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, “This revelation likely means that the IRS – including possibly Lois Lerner – violated federal tax law by transmitting this information to the Justice Department.”.

If Mueller is to the point of indicting people nobody has ever heard of for small scale activities under dubious legal theories, you have to think the big investigation is going nowhere. It's not like some twitter troll is suddenly going to turn state's evidence and bring down the president.

“My view from the hinterlands of America is that the Steele dossier is obviously Russian disinformation, bought by the Clinton campaign. If we can indict thirteen Russians for whispering disinformation into Americans ears what is the punishment for those who mainline it into our veins?”

Maybe, but it looks more and more to me that Steele and his “Russians” may have merely been involved to launder either FISA 702 database information and/or Clinton campaign generated opposition research (from Blumenthal, etc) into national intelligence information that could be used to acquire Title I Wiretap warrants and/or use the federal govt to undermine Trump’s campaign, then Presidency. Should be interesting to see how this unfolds.

Unless America can face up to the abuse of power that Obama oversaw, the republic really is lost. Mueller and Comey were both proteges of noted scandal goalie Eric Holder. Imagine if Hillary had been in charge and this rot was further entrenched.

I think Mueller realized quite some time ago that he wasn't going to find any collusion by Trump, but I also think he's been focusing on an obstruction of justice charge. He's going to get some revenge on behalf of his good buddy, Comey, don't you know. I also think he'll pursue it even though he knows he won't be able to win it in court unless he finds a judge as corrupt as Mueller himself. But the mere fact of the charge itself is the victory he'll be happy to take. Mueller, Comey, Brennan - they are dangerous to our country because not just because they believe they are acting to "save" the country and the constitution but because they believe that it's okay for them to twist or even ignore the constitution in order to do so.

Mueller’s unprecedented prosecution raises three novel arguments: first, that speaking out about American politics requires a foreign citizen to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act... second, that speaking out about American politics requires a foreign citizen list their source and expenditure of funding to the Federal Election Commission; and third, that mistakes on visa applications constitute 'fraud' on the State Department.

Trump's perfect troll would be to form a "Mueller Brigade" within Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to vigorously pursue such charges on behalf of the United States where ever such violations exist.

From "Does Mueller Indictment Mean Clinton Campaign Can Be Indicted for Chris Steele?" by Robert Barnes, who observes that Mueller chose targets who will never be brought to trial and therefore knew he was using a legal theory that would not be tested in court.

Does anyone who is sane actually believe the Russians with their supposed antics actually had any influence on the election? Did anyone who was going to vote for Hillary change their mind and voted for Trump because of the Russians? This whole thing was bullshit from the jump. Mueller himself needs to come clean on why he has spent millions on this BS and he really needs to come clean regarding his corruption while at the FBI.

"Trump's perfect troll would be to form a "Mueller Brigade" within Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to vigorously pursue such charges on behalf of the United States where ever such violations exist."

I don't see how trying to influence an election can be a crime. Trying to influence the outcome of an election is what an election is!

There's a difference between being a foreign citizen and working on behalf of a foreign government.

Well put. I'd been struggling with how to articulate this. How can it be a crime to have an opinion, and voice it, about an election in any country yours or not?

One comment on the article mentioned that there are plenty of pro-Clinton Facebook groups in Europe that predate the election; should those people be worried too? Not to mention, as others upthread have pointed out, all the noncitizens right here in the USA who are very politically active.

"Marry, sir, they have committed false report; moreover, they have spoken untruths; secondarily, they are slanders; sixth and lastly, they have belied a lady; thirdly, they have verified unjust things; and, to conclude, they are lying knaves."

Barnes believes, some commenter here also believe, that these three novel arguments are so outlandish that they would never be supported in a court. However, unless one of the people or institutions indicted more or less voluntarily arrives in court to contest the indictment (rather than staying safely in Russia), courts may never have the opportunity to render an opinion about the arguments. (I'm sure other commenters will correct me if I'm wrong about this.) But what might be the reason for Mueller to issue an indictment he knows would never lead to trial? Because if there is a reason, then it is sort of beside the point to argue about the merits of the legal theory of the indictment

The curious thing, if the left's anti-Trump hysteria is beaten, is that there will be no triumph about it. It's just the same problems we've always had, but without half of the population being insane and shouting about nothing.

I want Trump to test this legal theory by opening investigations into illegal aliens that Democrat politicians have used to influence the election. The DNC is making one a super delegate. Think of the collusion!

The Observer has obtained the contents of a 2006 audio tape that appears to reveal then-Sen. Hillary Clinton suggesting the U.S. should have rigged the Palestinian election. "I do not think we should have pushed for an election in the Palestinian territories. I think that was a big mistake,” Clinton is heard telling the editorial board of The Jewish Press about the Jan. 25, 2006 election for the second Palestinian Legislative Council, in which Hamas won a victory over the U.S.-preferred Fatah. “And if we were going to push for an election,” Clinton went on, “then we should have made sure that we did something to determine who was going to win.” - The Week

Rosenstein said Friday that the indictment does not contain any allegations that any Americans knowingly participated in the activity."There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity," he said. "There is no allegation in the indictment that the charge conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election."https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/16/politics/mueller-russia-indictments-election-interference/This news will make some people very sad.

This is an assault on free speech. If we believe in reciprocity this makes it illegal for me or anybody else to comment on foreign governments. If I criticize the Russian government I guess I'm committing a crime!

Wow, fascists around the world and here in the United States will love this. It's a left-wing dream come true!

Well here let me commit a crime. The Russian government has been for all my life interfering in US elections and trying to influence US opinions. With maybe a possible exception for a decade or so after the fall of the Soviet Union, they've spent huge sums of money on this sort of thing all along. Much of what the Russians, or really it's the Communists, have done in the past is to sow discord. Of course we have plenty of our own homegrown native discord, but they try to create it where it isn't and inflame it where it already exists.

Unfortunately, it is hard to imagine any way to protect ourselves from this influence. It's just an obvious consequence of sharing the world with adversaries.

The FBI's response, or Mueller's action, is insincere, dishonest, a cover-up of their own profound corruption, and an assault on human freedom.

A reminder: We still have no idea what conversations with members of Trump’s campaign were recorded, “legally” and illegally, in the past two years. Mueller’s indictments are simultaneously underwhelming and sweeping, which means we should expect another shoe to drop.

"Mueller chose targets who will never be brought to trial and therefore knew he was using a legal theory that would not be tested in court. " -- which means what? That he's got nothing? He had to come up with something that looks like he found wrongdoing but this is the best he can do.

Mueller really is in a pickle... from that Powerline blog entry, Mueller can't bring any relevant charges against anyone in Trump-land, or even Russian-land, without being caught in an equal protection trap. Clinton/DNC actually did what they are trying to catch Trump doing... any made up charges against Trump will cause folks to wonder why Clinton et al and even Obama should not be charged as well.

The dissonance caused by an unenforceable indictment using spurious legal reasoning against foreigners?

And that from an agency that has seen 17 demotions, early retirements and firings? Some of whom were initially hired by Mueller? And while the judge in the Flynn case was removed (and who has the power to order that removal? The supervising Supreme?) and the sentencing delayed five months under order that the government must turn over exculpatory evidence (implying strongly that such exists, and which would explain Contreras' removal as judge?).

If you are going to use the word cognitive, please pretend at cognition in your own rantings. Fair?

rhhardin said..."The curious thing, if the left's anti-Trump hysteria is beaten, is that there will be no triumph about it. It's just the same problems we've always had, but without half of the population being insane and shouting about nothing."

It's worse than that, a lot worse. They'll still be insane, and they'll be shouting about something. I kind of like having all the mad dogs barking up the Trump Tree 24/7. Makes it easy to tell where they are, and what they are.

Mueller really is in a pickle... from that Powerline blog entry, Mueller can't bring any relevant charges against anyone in Trump-land, or even Russian-land, without being caught in an equal protection trap.

As I noted above, the FBI is technically a co-conspirator in the Steele conspiracy to swing the election.

I agree with Prole in that the permanent government and the PTB are far from done; they have immense resources. They have many months to create messages before November.

This war is barely begun.

I expect the most significant move will be with regards to Trumps' business and finances, whether it comes under the Mueller umbrella or otherwise. I'm still surprised they didn't start there, and went with absurd "Russia" and "women" messages. Perhaps they still think these things work?

Where it leads is Mueller wrapping up his investigation in December. He will try to stay in business through the election.

The charges against Flynn will be dropped. They will try to drop the charges quietly. Trump won't allow that. There will be a spectacle made of Mueller's failure when the charges against Flynn are withdrawn and the (bull shit) case for obstruction is completely undone.

The case against Flynn must be dropped out of self-preservation for the attorneys who have withheld exculpatory evidence. They might face legal sanction including disbarment if they pursue the reckless strategy of defying the sitting judge who has a known distaste for government tomfoolery.

Ask yourself: If you were those government attorneys who have withheld exculpatory evidence, would you drop the case or try to explain to the new judge why you have been dishonest up to this point?

Ask yourself further: How was Contreras removed? Why was this judge, with such a strong and well-known penchant for demanding government lawyers play by the rules, added to the case? Does anybody believe those events opened by random assignment?

Would Mueller overplay his hand on those facts, reasonably deduced? Will he act so nakedly? Would be risk it all, that government bureaucrat climber? Mueller is operating with no net, now. Make no mistake.

The FBI has not declared open warfare. Their position is far too weak with only a minority of Congress to provide cover.

The FBI was happy to foment rebellion with a close-knit cabal of Leftists. And they expected cover from Obama (received) and Hillary (hoped for but unavailable) and Congress (Schiff and Schumer, ha!) and the press (Ben Rhodes was correct, if impolitic).

The same group recurs because they are, or were (some still are) the "non-political" leadership of the FBI/DOJ. These are important matters and big shots call dibs, most especially on things that are likely to come back to smack them personally.

If you pull people from the next rank below, how confident are you of them? I wouldnt be.

Buwaya's negativity may have something to do with his not being an American – there's something about Americans that just makes us optimistic, whether it's warranted or not. Whereas Buwaya's negativity has something of the old-world conservative about it.

"I'm still surprised they didn't start there, and went with absurd "Russia" and "women" messages. Perhaps they still think these things work?"

I am still surprised that "grab 'em by the pussy" didn't cost Trump the election. I guess that all those crazy women running around in pussy hats were already Hillary voters. Maybe the 19th Amendment *wasn't* the death warrant of the Republic.

If you pull people from the next rank below, how confident are you of them? I wouldnt be.

I think the next rank is too high.

In the movie "The Untouchables" there was a fantasy scene in which a fixed jury was swapped with one hearing another case in another courtroom.

I would say you would have to eliminate all those who have served in DC, then all the ones who have been ASACs.

I'm going to have a talk with my daughter tonight who is a 20 year agent. She surprised me in September 2016 by telling me that she would NOT vote for Hillary. She seems a perfect Hillary voter but she knew something.

The FBI has got to clean out the upper echelon or be reorganized. The 50% level would probably be a good one.

The fact that the Florida shooting quickly went to the topic of the FBI failure from the narrative standard of gun control told me they are in deep trouble.

unless one of the people or institutions indicted more or less voluntarily arrives in court to contest the indictment (rather than staying safely in Russia), courts may never have the opportunity to render an opinion about the arguments

An organization or "institution" appears in court by and through counsel. In fact, that is the only way they can appear because, although they are "legal persons," they are not real flesh and blood people. In the same way, "the United States" can only appear in court through the government attorneys. So, yes, the charges against the organizations do lend themselves to lawyers purporting to represent those organizations to file motions, etc. to contest the indictment.___________________

what might be the reason for Mueller to issue an indictment he knows would never lead to trial?

As for the individual persons, this raises an interesting question of legal ethics. To make public charges that a prosecutor knows he cannot proceed on is unethical. The right thing to do instead is to place any indictments under seal until they can go forward.

Meanwhile, courts do not like cases hanging out there in perpetuity. At some point, a court might act on its own initiative and dismiss the cases for want of actual prosecution. And if the government still wants to prosecute when it is possible for the matter to go forward, then they can always get a new indictment.

Having read through the indictment, I am struck by how much of it details on-line activity. There's no indication that any of this activity originated in any territory under the jurisdiction of the United States. Am I misreading things, or is the Government arguing that a non-U.S. citizen, in a non-U.S. location, is committing a crime just by pretending to be a U.S. citizen?

The wire fraud and identity theft parts seem clear enough, but they almost seem like tacked-on afterthoughts.

But what might be the reason for Mueller to issue an indictment he knows would never lead to trial? Because if there is a reason, then it is sort of beside the point to argue about the merits of the legal theory of the indictment.

Exactly, which is why Mueller's indictment is most likely a pretext for indicting someone associated with the Trump campaign.

The accounts in the series and film, are largely to Oscar fraleys telling, a news was nit that well regarded at the time of course there was little wishfulfillment as in the departed : there was no infiltration of bulges organization, he didn't get his just deserts for nearly a decade, nor did John connelly.

Earnest Prole:The players in the failed Deep State coup were acting in their own self interest. They had financial interests. They had interests in their own continued power. Those are simple solutions.

Once the coup fails, it continues to serve the interests of those Deep State players to minimize their own failure. They don't get to rewind and pretend the coup attempt never happened.

Mueller is under a new order by a new judge to reveal exculpatory evidence in the Flynn case. How was the judge replaced? Who had the power to replace Contreras, the first judge? Why would a person with the power to replace the judge actually exercise that power? Mueller has no choice but to drop the charges -OR- admit withholding that exculpatory evidence. What choice would you make, in Mueller's place, when the new judge holds incredible power and the will to use it?

My answers are simple: self-interested actors operating in their own self interest.

The indictment raises serious issues under the free speech clause of the First Amendment and .. do foreigners have political rights?For those who think foreign law is a guide, in most countries a foreigner talking about politics would be expelled ipso facto